Slashdot videos: Now with more Slashdot!

View

Discuss

Share

We've improved Slashdot's video section; now you can view our video interviews, product close-ups and site visits with all the usual Slashdot options to comment, share, etc. No more walled garden! It's a work in progress -- we hope you'll check it out (Learn more about the recent updates).

The funny part is that they tried astroturfing about open software, and have provided a very poor product to exactly the people that would notice. The general public wouldn't care about the quality of a router (and usually not even the features). The general public really doesn't care if a router is open (although the attitude is changing a bit). They targeted these deceptions toward exactly the audience that would find out about them. This sounds like some very poorly informed marketing people thought they could get away with it.

Apparently they care enough about the geek market to try to appeal to the router-modders and to try to build some momentum with astroturfing.

Now if they could just figure out that it's cheaper, more effective and more reliable to just do it right then everybody wins including them. Do it right and you don't have to astroturf - the grass roots want to grow.

I've understood from talking to an importer that WRT54GL was enough of a success (not a major seller, but an extremely consistent performer that just keeps on selling), that the gateway manufacturers must have realized there is a market here...

But I'd like to find a replacement already. E.g. Gigabit switch would be nice. But browsing through list of DD-Wrt compatible devices can't find a single also with functioning USB *and* available in Europe.

Yah 54g is great, I used it for a long long time, however 3 boxes I had always had some kind of issues with 3rd party firmwares dd-wrt, openwrt even tomato. From hanging to dropping WAN on DSL, I stayed frustrated. In due time, I figured my frustration had nothing to do with me living in my mom's basement.

And if you want to save a bit of money, you can pick up the older WRAP boards quite cheaply now. I have one and it runs a stock OpenBSD install on a 512MB compact flash card. Everything works nicely, although I did compile a custom kernel to remove everything that's not needed. The ALIX seems to only have one miniPCI slot, which is a shame. The WRAP had two, so you could plug in an 802.11 card and a crypto coprocessor for offloading VPN calculations.

I made the mistake of buying their KWGR614 "open source" router a couple years ago, and boy did it suck. The firmware delivered with it basically did not work. It would drop connections after 15 minutes of being on and then stop working. Everyone else who purchased one of these lumps of shit corroborated this behavior. Their employees denied it on the message boards, and in the end said "it's open source, fix it". Which is weak, because I bought the thing hoping to play with it when I got a chance, not

Didn't we just witness android os having the same issues? Many important aspects being proprietary (proprietary google apps) as well as the fact that the OS can't boot without the proprietary binary drivers from each handset device?

Yes, Netgear is to blame as that very same third-party firmware supports WPA and WPA2 on all other supported routers but not on Netgear's. But of course the GP is a moron because he expected Netgear to be able to ship a firmware with the functionality it normally comes with.

some manufacturing managers got together over tea and decided what to do with extra chassis/components for 1q2010 that weren't going to sell anyhow. Netgear is attempting to create a market the same way any other company creates a market, but is being shut down quickly in this case because the community is well informed and the technology is distinctly fraudulent by our definition of the "open source" term they have decided to embrace.

Currently we have an old white box server with FreeBSD set up as a gateway/proxy. It's about 5 years old and we've not done anything to it in 3 years, but it's cheap commodity hardware and it has a 600W powersupply that sucks down a lot of juice. We wrote our own software that gives people wireless access for 3 hours when they buy a drink (coffee shop). We're talking a 400Mhz AMD K6-2 with 256mb of Ram.

We'd like to put that software onto a router and have been looking at Single Board Computers, but have

Does it have to support your custom code? is it sufficient to gate access fo three hours? I think there might be hotspot packages that run under OpenWRT which might do the trick for you. (Captive HTTP splash/registration page, captive DNS until registered, etc.)

If OpenWRT would work, look at a Linksys WRT54GL. About as cheap as it gets.

You get three four ethernet LAN ports, wireless, and WAN port.

You'd think the four LAN ports would be bridged, and you'd be right, but the unit and OpenWRT support VLAN taggi

It would have to run our software because everything is run off of in house gift/loyality cards and we wrote this application to bridge the POS and gateway, along with a custom splash screen, etc. This way, when the customer gets their card swiped at the registered it automatically logs in their system after they've registered.

How do you tie the gift/loyalty card to a registered user? I can understand the card authenticating a user to your gateway, but how does it match a particular PC to that user? username/password on the card, which the user uses to get their three hours (authenticated by your swipe)? Or just a unique serial number on the card which they enter as part of authentication?

I'm getting the feeling that much of your custom work could be accomodated by existing hotspot software and the only "glue" would be getting th

My WRT54GS has been stable for fucking years, absolutely years, rock solid for yonks, working its buns off moving packets. A couple months ago, I decided I was going to look for a new router that could do everything my old 54 can do plus wireless-n at 5.8ghz (maintaining g at 2.4ghz) and gigabit ethernet. I had to look at the $250+ range and I'm not even sure if those units would do it because I didn't bother scrutinizing the specs at that price. It may have been necessary to move into commercial grade equipment to get everything I wanted. Screw that. I can just hang a 5.8ghz 'n' WAP off a gigabit switch and plug that into my old 54 for a lot less money and not have to worry about unknown bugs, stability, etc.

In fact, I'm about to pick up a 54GL for my grandfather. I made the mistake of thinking a $20 TrendNet would be fine for him since he doesn't need traffic shaping or anything beyond a basic wireless router. Wrong. Damn thing quits every 5 or 6 days like clockwork. He has to unplug/replug it to get it going again. A 54 is worth the extra money because it just frickin' works. Linksys really hit the nail on the head with that line. As long as consumer broadband is in the 10-20mbit range, I'm not going to waste my time trying other routers.

True. I went through the trouble of obtaining a WRT54G v4 for my family's home network as the load (two users who like HTTP and email and two who like BitTorrent and games) caused most cheap routers to crap out on a daily basis.

The thing is rock solid. I only need to reboot it very occasionally, maybe three or four times a year, and never because it hangs. On the other hand I have a Samsung router extending the network to the upper floor and the damn thing hangs once a month.

The WRT54G series all use Broadcom chips pretty much identical to the ones you'd find in Netgear routers. See here:

http://www.dd-wrt.com/wiki/index.php/Supported_Devices#Netgear

I am not proud to admit this, but I took a CCNA years ago, and I've built literally dozens of wifi networks using various combinations of off-the-shelf (or off-the-refurbish-list) routers and stock/modified firmware. I am a minor authority on the subject of cheap-ass consumer routers.

Broadcom is what you'd call a "fabless semiconductor company," which means they design chips but don't actually manufacture them. Almost all consumer routers you can find today use Broadcom-based system-on-a-chips, which consists of basically a CPU, flash and DRAM, ethernet interface, and half a wifi-radio, all crammed onto a single CMOS.

Broadcom designs the chip, someone else leases the design for the chip (and all the accompanying drivers) from Broadcom, then the person that leased the chip pays a third person who owns a CMOS fabrication plant to actually manufacture the chip. Then the chips get sold to yet another party, like Linksys, Netgear, Trendnet, Asus (my pick!), Buffalo, and others. The chip has several dozen wires hanging off the end of it, and someone connects them to various external ports or devices on the router: ten wires make a bank of five Ethernet ports, two or four wires are connected to one or two antennas (more if you have MIMO), more wires are connected to the status LEDs and buttons, et cetera. The end manufacturer is also responsible for providing firmware, which historically they've done by combining Broadcom's drivers with some code they ripped off from the Linux kernel (some manufacturers, like Asus and Buffalo, are reputed to be good about providing source code when they do this). Then they put it in a box with a compatible power adapter, slap a lame warranty on it (because many governments and retailers require them), and sell it.

The end result is that pretty much all the routers you can buy are nearly identical in every way except firmware. Furthermore, almost no manufacturer can actually be bothered to provide long-term support for these routers (why fix a broken routers when they can sell you a new one?), and since firmware development is by far the most difficult and expensive part of what the end manufacturers (eg Linksys) actually DO, this is the area where most consumer routers really fail.

(The other problem is that most Broadcom chips only have about ~100 MB/sec of memory bandwidth on chip, tops, which is obviously less than one gigabit per second (~125MiB/sec). This means that there are no consumer routers you can buy that are actually capable of routing a gigabit of traffic per second- at best they all seem to crap out around 160 megabits per second, in my experience (note: you have even less bandwidth when traversing the NAT gateway, particularly with traffic shaping enabled). This is mostly a limit inherited from the CMOS manufacturing process they use, I think - it's the same process they use to make DRAM and flash, and while it's cheap relative to the number of transistors you get, the resulting chips are rather slow compared to what you get with optical lithography.)

As for your grandfather's router, I suggest you try running BitTorrent on a computer connected to it, and see what happens when you quickly spawn hundreds of new TCP connections. I'm betting it'll choke, because the onboard NAT has to keep track of each individual TCP connection, and your $20 Trendnet router (which is probably quite old indeed, regardless of how recently you purchased it) probably isn't expiring old TCP connections for a good 12 hours. There's probably a way you can set the NAT TCP timeout value to something more reasonable, like 15 minutes (if it's not in the web-based interface, try downloading the config file and editing it with a text editor - I shouldn't have to tell you the risk [wikipedia.org] from doing this). You can also look up DD-WRT,

A lot of firmwares, like DD-WRT, have issues with binary only drivers and programs. I ran into it with the nas process in DD-WRT a few months ago.

I had decided to move to WPA2 Enterprise. It sort of worked, but there is a long standing bug in DD-WRT relating to WPA2 Enterprise. WPA2 Enterprise depends on Radius. The nas process will only try a Radius server once. If it fails, then it won't try again. The only workaround is to kill the nas process one way or another. Then to make it all the more fun

Say you're a real company, with a real closed source code base and you decide to make an open source push.

You're going to have some code that you can't open, either for legal reasons or patent reasons or internal politics or because it's heavily patched code that only makes sense to a few key employees, and you want to clean it up before releasing it. So parts of it will remain closed. Otherwise, do explain how you'd sidestep all the legal, technical and political issues, while running a company and deliver

As the developer of a popular fork of Tomato, I'd like to address a few points:

Not all features supported

Specific to their Tomato port:

1 > WPA is not working.2 > There is no support of SAMBA server .3 > NAS is accessible only through command line using ftp. No GUI support toaccess NAS is available till now.

1: Presumably, WPA2 is, which means that this isn't a showtopper, just a big annoyance. There's actually only one missing feature here, WPA support. The rest would not be expected.

2/3: Mainline Tomato doesn't support any of this on USB-supporting routers anyhow.

Binary kernel modules

This is no different than mainline Tomato, which also relies on binary kernel modules. In fact, most opensource firmwares DO.

Looking at this from the perspective of one of the authors of Tomato/MLPPP (bonding multiple DSL lines using a fork of Tomato), only WPA is really of any concern, and even then, you can work around it by using WPA2. This router adds support for 802.11N, more (MUCH FASTER) RAM, and a far faster CPU (200 -> 480MHz, plus other architectural improvements). Considering that memory throughput/latency and CPU power are our main bottlenecks when bonding multiple DSL lines, this router remains quite interesting despite the lack of WPA.

Is there a router with the following:1.802.11b/g WiFi (N would be a bonus but not essential)2.Ethernet (dont need Gigabit, 10/100 is fine)3.ADSL2/2+ supportand 4.100% open source software with NO binary blobs for Ethernet, USB, WiFi or DSL

My current router has all those features (except possibly only being ADSL1) but it has binary blobs for the WiFi and DSL.

However, the article summary was enough to explain everything. Netgear is using Broadcomm chips. I've worked in the embedded firmware arena before; Broadcomm does NOT release its drivers under open source. You only get to see the source if you and your company lawyers sign really nasty NDAs, perferably in blood. I'm pretty sure the specs for programming the chips are under NDA, too. Netgear does not have a choice about releasing the drivers as binary blobs if they are using Broadcomm stuff. The only way to get open-source Broadcomm drivers is to reverse engineer them, and Netgear probably isn't in the business of reverse-engineering their suppliers product. Hell, they're probably contractually forbidden to do so.

You will never get a fully open source product from a vendor that buys from Broadcomm, until Broadcomm changes its policies. Period, full stop.

1. They are proclaiming it to be open source, which is deceptive. It's "open source" except where it matters (device drivers/modules) from a maintainability perspective.

2. Their employees are astroturfing

3. Releasing open source drivers does not in any way reveal your chip mask and hardware architecture. Atheros' real competitors have access to electron microscopes and everything else it takes to buy a router off the shelf and copy chips exactly; simply keeping the drivers closed is not going to deter, say, realtek or broadcom in the slightest.

Besides, Buffalo is supporting open source through action (money) not just in press releases - beating Netgear to the punch by a couple of years. Netgear is just playing the "me too! Signed, metoo@aol.com" game.

1. They are proclaiming it to be open source, which is deceptive. It's "open source" except where it matters (device drivers/modules) from a maintainability perspective.

Your statement is in fact deceptive and skewed. You are buying hardware with a lot of proprietary technology in it. I'm sure there are at least a hundred different proprietary components in the device. The device is not open source, it does however, run some open source software. It does not run OSS exclusively.

Your statement is in fact deceptive and skewed. You are buying hardware with a lot of proprietary technology in it. I'm sure there are at least a hundred different proprietary components in the device. The device is not open source, it does however, run some open source software. It does not run OSS exclusively.

You are buying hardware with a lot of proprietary technology in it. I'm sure there are at least a hundred different proprietary components in the device.... Its funny that you accept all of the rest of the device being massively proprietary, yet demand all of the source to the software.

Since these components are soldered in, as in most hardware, there's a limit to how much hacking/patching/maintaining I could do. Not that there isn't open source hardware, but the barrier of entry is a bit higher when you have to actually fab things yourself.

I mean, the barrier of entry to software development is an Internet connection and the ability and desire to learn. You can actually download all the tools you need. Hardware isn't quite there yet.

> They are proclaiming it to be open source, which is deceptive. It's "open source" except> where it matters (device drivers/modules) from a maintainability perspective.

Open source drivers do not add much maintainability on an embedded system such as this. What does the openness get you other then, perhaps, the ability to correct for incompatible changes in the kernel? It's not like the hardware is going to get swapped out or updated, and realistically there isn't likely a whole lot of new functiona

Having open drivers allows you to upgrade the kernel, which as you pointed out might be subject to incompatible changes..It also allows you to change the kernel, what if someone wanted to put OpenBSD or something else on this device?A device which is restricted to running a small subset of available linux versions is hardly open...

Also, hardware where the only difference between a $100 card and a $1000 card are the drivers is a total scam... Having bought a piece of hardware, people should have the right to

> Having open drivers allows you to upgrade the kernel, which as you pointed out might be subject to incompatible changes..

Well, perhaps I should have clarified:

In an embedded device, the hardware is what it is. Nothing get added, nothing gets removed, and there is only one configuration. Because of this, you don't even need a driver model; you can just hard code everything into whatever layer the driver would plug into. Ergo, whatever incompatible changes may come about in the kernel can simply be ha

one advantage of all this openness is that people can come up with new and unexpected uses for devices. Maybe the board has a mini-pci slot on it and they want to swap in a mini-pci card that does something totally different.

People have added memory to their linksys WRTs... I'm trying to say when the software is open, the hardware can be modified and extended too.

But the Buffalo and Linksys routers that are supported by DD/Hyper/OpenWRT and Tomato, as far as I know, contain Broadcom radios and require the Broadcom binaries.

I'm no expert, but I did make a few modifications to HyperWRT Thibor. After loading up Busybox to do the compile on my Linux box, I found out that the source package included Broadcom binaries to support the radio. Most of my changes were UI-related so I didn't delve too deeply into the actual radio API, but the Broadcom binary was compiled into the eventual package.

Maybe Jon rewrote the driver for the Broadcom radio in Tomato, but (genius that he is) I sincerely doubt that. That's a massive undertaking, and since Broadcom has a stable and well-established binary for their "G" radios, there's little point in trying to rewrite it. Hopefully their binarly (or Netgear's implementation of it, more likely) will improve.

So, by that definition, I'm not sure if you can honestly consider any current consumer-grade router to be "Open Source" (from a purist perspective). The most popular "modder routers" are all Broadcom units, and all require the same binary to access the radio. All of them appear to contain restricted drivers.

Many of these routers use Atheros chipsets, which do have completely open drivers available...There are also other chipsets which have fully open drivers available, tho some drivers have proprietary firmware blobs these execute on the device itself and are thus os independent... I have a device running OpenWRT which uses an Atheros chipset....I tend to avoid anything made by Broadcom...

Interestingly, Broadcom also make wired ethernet cards and have released open drivers for these, my last experience with broadcom wired ethernet (i believe a 100mbit chipset 440 or something) was terrible, it was incompatible with some types of switches (major packetloss and abysmal performance, other brands of nic talked to the switches fine) and it would drop link when you flooded it with traffic.

I think one of the reasons wireless vendors in particular use blobs is because of the FCC compliance requirements. Can you really release an open-source programmable radio? Does the FCC even allow that? How can the FCC certify that it doesn't interfere with licensed spectrum, if the software can be changed, therefore changing the characteristics of the radio?

The FCC will consider what is submitted for certification, and that is what manufacturers are allowed to sell under the certification. The FCC certification process doesn't control modifications by the end user.

I mean, you could modify a wireless router by stuffing a huge RF amp on the output, and that wouldn't pass FCC certification; but you're just an end user, so they don't care about breaking certification. They'll deal with you when the complaints from others start rolling in.

I put dd-wrt on a Linksys box. Not sure about the chipset or the driver's blobular status, but the dd-wrt ui allowed me to increase the power of the transmitter above 1/4 watt, which is not FCC compliant.

Laws governing permissible transmit power and frequencies vary around the world... Most of the official firmwares on these devices can be configured to know your location and will adjust the available options according to local laws... Sometimes the options are hard set in the firmware distributed in each region. They are almost always set in software because that's much cheaper than producing different hardware revisions for each country.

It's idealistic to want all software to be open - but for companies which pour a lot of intellectual property into their drivers and firmware, I find it understandable that they wouldn't want their work made available to competitors' products.

No, they might not want to show people just how technically bad their products are though. There is no 'intellectual property' in drivers, you cannot copy a chip's design by looking at it's drivers. MANY people in the chip design field have stated this already, in fact it has been mentioned so often by now that I'm surprised you didn't know this.

And even then, you should demand freedom from the companies you buy products of, you need this freedom to protect your rights as a consumer. Finding apologies for and sympathizing with the company that is trying to take away your freedom is much like saying "Yes Bob beat all the teeth out of my mouth, but I understand he had a bad day at work."

And if you feel that the freedom to do as you please with the devices you own is not important to you, then why did you post this? You talk about "Idealogical" and yes it is, partially. But the ideology is not that all software should be free because all software should be free. All software should be free so that writers of software do not have the power to abuse users of the software. Or in this case sell buggy hardware without any way for the consumer to find this out until it is too late.

OR being able to apply security updatesOR being sure that your router doesn't inject advertisements into your webpagesetc. etc. etc.

If they're not using any open-source in their binaries themselves, it's no violation

Yes it is, it says so in the license of the software we're talking about (Linux) This is not open for interpretation.

My opinion is this - if you don't like it, don't use it.

Indeed if Netgear doesn't want to play by the rules of the GPL, then they don't have to use GPL code. But they do want to use GPLd code because it saves them an asston of licensing on VXWorks or other router operating systems. They want to use Linux, so they have to play by the rules of Linux which are : If you link code to Linux code code, your code needs to be free.

The broadcom drivers link against Linux code and thus it needs to be free. If they don't want to do that, they can NOT USE LINUX, it's their choice. They can't have it both, they chose to use Linux themselves because they apparently found it beneficial to them, now they need to play by the rules. Or do you think that the authors of VMWorks wouldn't mind if Linksys decides to not play by their rules and just not pay?

The broadcom drivers link against Linux code and thus it needs to be free. If they don't want to do that, they can NOT USE LINUX, it's their choice.

Wait a sec... binary blob drivers are used against Linux all the time. Heck, my Ubuntu-running laptop uses Nvidia's binary drivers for 3D support. Are you saying that Nvidia is violating the GPL by providing these?

Activism helps spread the word to others so that their dollars can vote too. It also more aggressively lets companies know that they've done something wrong... sometimes they really don't know unless you tell them.

It probably uses a binary driver for the wireless, if not for the switching. I think that was the grandparent's point.

What the grandparent fails to realize is that Netgear is marketing the device as open-source, when it contains significant closed-source components. If you say something is open-source, that's an all-or-nothing. What Netgear should have said was that their router "uses open-source software."

Ran a Wrt54g with ddwrt and now on buffalo.. second buffalo through my own idiocy but they have both been extremely stable. "generally a reboot required because I mess up something doing remote SSH" never rebooted otherwise.
My Linksys was getting long in the tooth and would randomly lock up. "I mounted a 80mm fan on top and had boosted signal and added antenna" The strain was more than it could bear.
Still it lasted around 3 years.

Everyone that has converted a router to OSS, raise their hand... Everyone else leave the room.

Why? I build my own using Soekris [soekris.com] hardware and call it a day. That's not to say I'm not interested in what other folks are doing, or perhaps more accurately, what they're trying to do and what they're up against.

OpenWRT on a Netgear DG834v1 here. That's the wires-only version. I don't trust wireless running on embedded hardware after seeing how Linksys tried to milk its customers with the WRT54GL, so my wifi's running via a USB stick in my server box.

After dealing with the flimsy crash prone ISP provided DSL modem/router I trashed it three years ago and setup a m0n0wall router in about 10 minutes using old spare PC parts. I have never looked back and highly recommend it. Sure if you use a standard PC your going to use quite a bit more power but I switched mine to a cheap $150 Atom setup with a dual LAN card in the PCI slot. Works like a charm. I even have my old Linksys WAP connected to the third port and isolated from my LAN, except for SSH.

The very same Broadcom blobs are included in dd-wrt. It must also be noted that dd-wrt is supposedly GPL software, yet the evidence in SVN clearly shows that a large portion of the code is Copyright evil corporations such as Intel and Microsoft and that these corporations have NOT given permission to use the code under the GPL. It is in many cases not even clear if they give permission to distribute the code at all.

I have that unit. EXTREMELY well supported by DD-WRT, and an excellent performer with DD-WRT.

I cannot speak as to how much better DD-WRT is than the stock firmware - I bought the Buffalo specifically because of good DD-WRT support and my first task upon unboxing was to flash it, so I have zero experience with stock firmware.

I've always been fond of HyperLink [hyperlinktech.com] stuff. I'm not affiliated with them. Linksys uses standard connectors, so any 2.4ghz antenna or amp with the correct connector will work ('N' type last I checked, been a while). Easy enough to google up pictures of different antenna connectors so you get the right one.

Sun blew their load and open sourced everything, even valuable things. They left almost no value in their platform. Red Hat made sure there was no supported free version of RHEL- CentOS being outside of their organization. Sun even started to give away Solaris 10. I believe their documentation was openly available, also. Red Hat makes sure to keep their documentation only usable by subscribers.

Red Hat simply has a better monetized business model. Sun died the death of a company that "truly believed" in open

Sun blew their load and open sourced everything, even valuable things. They left almost no value in their platform. Red Hat made sure there was no supported free version of RHEL- CentOS being outside of their organization.

And how is that significantly different from Sun? The only way to get support on Solaris to purchase a support contract. And no "freetard" is going to be running other products like Oracle with a support contract on a box without an OS support contract either.

I believe their documentation was openly available, also. Red Hat makes sure to keep their documentation only usable by subscribers.

That's funny. The real problem with sun is that they did not 'believe' - upper management's philosophy did not trickle down fast enough to the trenches, Sun was schizo instead of fully committed and thus had a lot of difficulty convincing customers that they were honest about their intentions. Red hat "keeps it real" by being fully open - the only thing they keep locked up is their trademarks.

Red Hat has value in their commercialized platform. They have things like RHN. Besides this, they're specifically an open source consulting firm. They don't make money by giving things away. Also, they're focused on the parts of their platform that make money... while Sun wasted money on things like OpenOffice, which is basically a scourge to any organization that wastes cash on it.

What other organization has managed to squeeze money out of the free software specific community? The most profitable linux-ori

Now you've got me LOLing on the floor - all RedHat software products, ALL of them, are GNU licensed. Seems to me that you know even less about Redhat than you do about Sun.

The GPL is not a brand, it's just a license. You are an abject moron. Red Hat does not use GNU as a major advertising point. Dig around on their website and see how many levels you have to go through to find GNU or the FSF mentioned.

All your ranting says to me is that you've never been a significant commercial customer of Sun and are totally unfamiliar with the support services they provide. RHN? All commercial unix vendors have an equivalent.

So what would Sun's equivalent to RHN be? It's more than just a package manager. What does Sun offer that gives a web based interface to server management?

Honestly, I am more than open to buying hardware. I'll even buy software. In this case I specifically buy hardware that has a hacker/modding community around it, because I want to be able to extend basic functionality. Not having WPA/WPA2 support is pretty inexcusable in terms of routing hardware sold under the guise of supporting "Open Source".

I'm currently using WRT54GLs along with a gigabit hub and stand alone wireless-N AP in my apartment and in my home... I was actually looking at the WNR3500L, de

Lets just hope our municipalities don't use your logic when they say the water out of our taps is 'potable'. I would hate to think that after people start dying around town that the water authority doesn't make the statement of "We didn't say that it was _only_ potable water that we were pumping through your pipes."

only minor. i'm one of those people who leaves their network open on purpose, i suspect a lot of people who care about open source routers will do the same.

besides, anyone who relies solely on these types of encryption to secure their networks shouldn't be running a network at all.

you'd need a pretty good antenna to get a signal off my AP from the road but i'd be a hypocrite to not leave it open. besides giving away the last bit of plausible denyability we have to stop a few losers getting another hi

Some routers have a mini-pci slot in them for their wireless cards. In those cases you can probably replace it. Check the specs on the supported hardware list on dd-wrt, or the other project pages to find out if a particular model has the mini-pci slot.

Another option would be to use a model that has USB port(s), and throw a USB wifi adapter on it.

By the looks of this they are 100% completely closed source. The only thing that is open source is stuff that can be obtained elsewhere.

They have only done the legally acceptable but frowned upon practice of taking open source software, writing closed source drivers and then touting their use of open source as some kind of gift to the community.

In all fairness, Harald's original blog post isn't that rude to them; the Slashdot summary, I believe, is condescending and wrong.

However, I and many other folks are not as concerned about binary modules as Harald is. I view a binary module as a good first step - once a company gets comfortable with part of the code being open source, they'll gradually be receptive to open sourcing other modules. In many cases, yes, this takes a long time; and in some cases it causes companies to get scared and backtrack on open source commitments.

But still I view open source with some binaries as better than no commitments. I encourage people who view themselves as open source advocates to maintain a professional and respectful attitude towards companies who haven't opened up completely.

Perhaps it was vindictive of me to call the previous hype a sham, but Netgear was trying to frame their router as the router to get for running third party firmware on, when in reality it is a poor choice in comparison to various others that are both cheaper and more well supported by third party firmware. Their own summary seemed deliberately misleading to me (it was certainly misleading, deliberate or not), so I wasn't feeling very charitable when I wrote this one.

The problem isn't that they aren't "sufficiently" open, it's that they aren't open at all and are pretending to be. Binary modules and broken independent firmware's aren't open. Harold is right to call them out for false advertising. Astro-Turfing is a real problem, it's basically false advertising and the FTC is allowing it to happen.

What a great way to gently remind them to have a positive attitude towards open source!

So you say we should e.g. congratulate Nvidia for supplying an obfuscated 2D-only piece of shit driver to "encourage" them to open the 3D driver as well? No, positive motivation does not work with corporations. Nothing gets done until lts of people complain. Providing half-assed open source support is actually more harmful that not providing any support at all, because it takes away the manpower needed to implement proper support. If 90% of users are satisfied with the limited functionality, it usually means you have 10x less developers working on proper support.

I may have missed something, but Nvidia doesn't claim that their driver is open source, only that the tiny kernel interface piece is. On the other hand, Netgear is touting hardware's open-source friendliness, when it reality it isn't. The problem is that Netgear is being extremely disingenuous here.